Hi, I think it's a nice to have and an improvement. It's quite clean, even if the number of Makefile's can really increase.
I've some questions: Q1) It seems obvious (at least to me), that DOCS and EXAMPLES should/could become subpackages. How it could be handled by pkg? Are you thinking to add some "magic" to enable or disable the automatic installation of specific subpackages? Q2) are we opening the door the -devel packages like some Linux distros? Q3) Do you think there is a general way to decide what should stay an OPTION and what should/could become a FLAVOR? Q4) Can FLAVORs be in CONFLICT with each others or only conflict-free FLAVOR will be accepted? If ports can depend to FLAVOR, strange CONFLICTS can arise.. Thanks for the great job! I'll keep contributing as much as I can. Best regards, Luca On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Franco Fichtner <fra...@lastsummer.de> wrote: > >> On 20 Dec 2016, at 9:42 AM, Franco Fichtner <fra...@lastsummer.de> wrote: >> >> To emphasise on this: > > And lastly... if we have the automatic "default" flavour that is > defined by the OPTIONS_DEFAULT knobs, we could finally avoid pkg > upgrading custom builds by knowing that somebody built a "custom" > version of their port and that there is no equivalent to upgrade > to. > > This is exciting! > > > Cheers, > Franco > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
